Are NIMBYs appeasable? Often not

Sometimes, opponents of new housing claim that they aren’t really against all housing- they just want housing to be “gentle density” (which I think usually means “not tall”), or “affordable” (which I think usually means “lower-income housing”). Even if these people are sincere, are their opinions widely shared?

A recent poll of Rhode Island residents suggests that the answer is “no.” Page 18 of the poll includes answers to questions about several types of housing, ranging from single-family homes to “affordable housing” to public housing to duplexes.

When asked whether they wanted type X of housing in Rhode Island, every single type got between 73 percent and 81 percent support.  So this disproves the idea that people hate apartment buildings and love single-family houses, or hate market-rate housing and love affordable housing.

On the other hand, when asked whether they wanted each of these types of building in their own neighborhood, not one of these options was supported by a majority of poll respondents. Even single-family houses, the most popular option, got only 42 percent support. Affordable housing got only 34 percent support, duplexes got 26 percent, and public housing got 21 percent.  (I am not sure what the difference between “affordable housing” and “public housing” is- my guess is that the average citizen thinks that anything that isn’t a mansion is “affordable”, while academics and planners interpret the term much more narrowly).

What do I get out of these results?

1.  Local control over zoning will rarely lead to an adequate amount of new housing because NIMBYism* is a collective-action problem. The average person thinks of new neighbors as like a power plant or a prison- something that is clearly beneficial and should exist somewhere, but ideally not near them.**    
2. The notion that you can appease NIMBYs by building “missing middle housing” (or tiny single-family houses) instead of traditional apartments is usually wrong, because most of the same people who don’t want an apartment building also don’t want a duplex or a house.
3. The notion that you can appease NIMBYs by selling housing as “affordable” is also usually wrong because most of the same people who don’t want any other type of housing will oppose it no matter how affordable it is.  And even some of the people who don’t think “affordable” is a dirty word will oppose it if it is labelled “public housing”.
4.  On the positive side, this data makes me feel more comfortable about advocating for larger amounts of housing: if most people who oppose a 20-story building will also oppose a 20-unit building, you might as well fight for both.  

*For people who are not regular readers of this blog, “NIMBY” is an acronym for “Not In My Back Yard.” A true NIMBY believes that something (such as new apartments or a power plant) might be a fine idea as long as it is in someone else’s neighborhood.

**This discussion might make readers wonder: if NIMBYs oppose every type of housing, how does anything ever get built? This topic deserves more research, but my guess is that sometimes a rezoning doesn’t attract enough public interest to influence zoning boards and city councils.